Why Wolff and Castro split on consolidation plan

Updated 11:39 pm, Saturday, March 2, 2013

Lyle Larson entered the Legislature two years ago with a go-big-or-go-home mentality.

Never one to nibble around the edges, this folksy, back-slapping outdoorsman has advocated for some extreme governmental reforms through the years: the abolition of the federal income tax in favor of a sales-based Fair Tax; a statewide tent-jail system based on Arizona's Maricopa County model; and 12-year term limits for state legislators and statewide elected officials.

Larson's most enduring dream centers on the consolidation of our city and county governments. As a former member of both the San Antonio City Council and the Bexar County Commissioners Court, he came away convinced that duplication of services is draining local government resources.

Most Popular

As he did during the 2011 legislative session, Larson has introduced legislation that would initiate a city-county consolidation process. By any measure, it's a long shot — as in a “getting struck by lightning while on your way to collect your lottery winnings” type of long shot.

If the legislation somehow navigates its way through the Lege, it will then require a statewide vote to amend the Texas constitution, followed by a local vote to approve a specific merger plan.

Given the long odds faced by Larson's two companion bills, the real action is happening on the periphery — between County Judge Nelson Wolff and Mayor Julián Castro.

Wolff has grown frustrated during the past couple of years with Castro's reluctance to annex new territory into the city and argues that the county is being forced to absorb burdens it can't afford. For that reason, he welcomes the idea of consolidation.

Castro, on the other hand, sees Larson's bill as an attempt to fold the city government into the county (a notion that draws this tongue-in-cheek response from Wolff: “That sounds like a delightful idea!”) without input from the City Council.

Castro says he doesn't oppose consolidation per se and generally has approached the concept with diplomatic restraint. In 2010, when Larson floated the idea on the campaign trail, Castro told me, “We need to coordinate our functions more closely to save taxpayer money. But with respect to any particular legislation, I haven't seen any.”

Well, he's seen it now, and he's not pleased. On Tuesday, he fired off a letter to state Rep. Garnet Coleman, D-Houston, the chairman of the House County Affairs Committee, saying Larson's plan “runs counter to the purpose of streamlining services” by increasing personnel costs, creating multiple retirement systems, and diluting police and fire services.

Castro's decision to stick his neck out so early in the process is surprising, and possibly unnecessary, given the likelihood that the bill will die in committee.

For his part, Wolff disputes the notion that the Larson plan would center all local power within the Commissioners Court, pointing out that the details would be ironed out by a local charter commission composed of members appointed by both the City Council and Commissioners Court.

Larson can't resist taking a shot at Castro over the mayor's determination to kill the plan before it can reach the voters.

“I guess he picks and chooses what he wants folks to vote on,” Larson says. “With (Castro's) Pre-K 4 SA (program), he thought the voters should vote on that.”

Castro has an important ally in Rep. Joe Farias, D-San Antonio, the vice chairman of the County Affairs Committee.

“While I support policies to increase efficiency and reduce duplication of services,” Farias says, “I cannot support this measure at this time because the city and county have not been able to reach a resolution on this matter.”

Wolff acknowledges that there's a Don Quixote quality to Larson's crusade. Even if the Larson plan reaches fruition, the lesson of cities such as Indianapolis and Nashville is that it will take at least a decade to sort itself out. Any serious savings only will emerge over a long-term period.

“I think it's a legitimate topic for debate and one we should get on the table,” Wolff says. “It's worth exploring.”